2013年4月6日 星期六

發展弱勢社群的社群劇場本身就是一個弱勢社群



Some Case Studies of 20 Years of Hong Kong Community Theatre

“There are more and more ‘performing arts venues’ in Hong Kong – the many city halls, the Academy for Performing Arts, the Hong Kong Arts Centre, the Fringe Club, City Contemporary Theatre....Nevertheless, we still need people who are willing to perform outside these venues.” (Yu Sau, 1987)

The paragraph above is quoted from the preface of the book “Elections – A Negation” published by the People’s Theatre. It was 1987, an era full of life : the negotiation between China and Great Britain over the future of Hong Kong after 1997 had been completed and Hong Kong’s future was settled. The economy was running well. In the area of the performing arts, the Council for the Performing Arts and the Academy for the Performing Arts had been established. Especially with the former, the resources it made available had generated great impetus for growth in the local theatre. The establishment also grew – both the Urban Council and the Regional Council set up in 1986 also provided much financial resources for the construction of venues and the presentation of programmes. Even more important was the fact that the people of Hong Kong became concerned with various issues which they had never thought of – identity, the question of “root”, local culture and Chinese culture.

Promotional Community Theatre
With respect to the fostering of a local theatre culture, the author began in 1983 to promote a community theatre movement in Shatin. His inspiration came from three sources: firstly, his teacher Mr. Lee Woon Wah once spoke in an open forum the sense of mission of the Chinese theatre artists and this made a significant impact on him. Secondly, the Hong Kong Government commissioned Andrew Leigh, the Administrator of the Old Vic Theatre in England to write a development report on Hong Kong’s theatre. In the report, various issues concerning regional theatre and development of original works were discussed. Thirdly, in 1984, the author was involved in the writing and directing of  “ I Am Hong Kong” with the Chung Ying Theatre and the success of this original work and its touring format added to his confidence. So in October, 1985, the author formed the Shatin Theatre Company together with Cheung Ping Kuen and Cheung Yim Cheung, and called it a “community theatre.”

In a newspaper article, the author reflected on the first ten years of the Shatin Theatre Company. The idea then was to set up some kind of “seeding areas” for grass-root theatre as an alternative to the main stream establishment. The way it worked was to tour the production to where the audiences were with dramatic contents relevant to society. This experiment was shelved because of the amateur nature of the company and other limitations. Instead of touring, the company decided to engage full time professionals to do training in the high schools. However, it continued to organise the Shatin Drama Festival and theatre fair, which were still very much community oriented. ( Hardy Tsoi, 1996)

There was not a lot of theory – just a group of theatre enthusiasts seeking an alternative to the current theatre and such was the beginning of the community theatre  in Shatin. New development naturally attracted attention. Da Shan, a people’s theatre worker who had attended community theatre workshops had this to say,” The Shatin Theatre Company possessed all the conditions of a community theatre...with the exception of one, i.e. the organic operation, organization and development from the bottom up.” (Da Shan 1987). Da Shan’s criticism was based on visiting community artist, N. Owen’s description of the art form. According to Owen, Community Theatre can assume the following formats: “Firstly, to stage a ‘related’ play by a company from outside the community and the purpose is to provoke thought and discussion among the audience. Secondly, to stage an open-ended play that will allow the audience to finish so as to provide an opportunity for information and opinion exchange and discussion of what they had faced in the process. Thirdly, to help organize a community theatre group for the community. (Da Shan 1987) N. Owen also pointed out that “No matter what kind of community theatre, the most important feature is to allow the community to understand its own situation through theatre. The community will then seek to make changes for the better. The whole process must be based on its own understanding and needs. Therefore the characteristics of a community theatre are discussion, participation and self organization. (Da Shan 1987). Another point considered by Da Shan to be faulty is that the survival of a community theatre should not rely on the funding of government or it would lose its independence.

In actual fact, when the Shatin Theatre Company engaged a full time community arts officer to provide service to the schools, it had also chosen the newly established Shatin Town Hall as its performance base. In terms of the plays staged, although many of them were original works, the community flavour had diminished. However, the author’s faith in the community theatre had not been wavered. He felt that the “From Training to Performance” model as testified by drama training in schools and youth centres followed by the Shatin Drama Festival could be further developed providing more time and money were available. He recognized that it should be professionally run and developed, and professionalisation was the inevitable trend. As good as his words, he founded the full-time group, Prospects Theatre Company, which took over the community theatre work originally conducted by the Shatin Theatre Company in 1993. At the same time, with funding support from the Hong Kong Arts Development Council, Prospects was beginning to “export” “community theatre” programmes to other districts in Hong Kong. (1)

The exported format, which usually ran within a period not less than 6 months, had consolidated from the Shatin prototype with the following features:

1.  Schools and youth and centres in the district were the primary targets;
2.  Theatre training will be given;
3.  Related drama activities will be organized as a complement;
4.  Organising a contest for amateur theatre groups in the district;
5.  a script about the people and events related to the district will be written and  people in the district will be invitedto participate in the performance of the plays
6.  If necessary, before leaving the district, assistance will be provided in setting up theatre bodies in order to sustain theatre activities in the district.

Among the aforementioned features, the most remarkable would be number 5. A good example would be when as the Eastern District Community Theatre Programme was conducted, Prospect’s Paul Poon adapted the novel “The Sun Has Set”, which is about the district Saiwanho, by Shu Hong Shing into a play of the same title.

The model described above is directly related to an earlier field study visit in England by the author for a report after the visit. The author wrote:

“I went to Sussex, England in 1987 to observe the Community Theatre there. Famous playwright/director Ann Jellicoe was the founder of this type of community theatre and I was very much inspired. They operated in the following way: professional artists from the theatre company would take up residency in a town for half a year or up to one year. They would help the residents to organize various theatre activities such as training workshops, games, parade and carnivals, etc. At the same time, a playwright would do research with an aim to write a play about the town’s history. During my visit, I was able to catch such a play being performed. Platforms were set up inside a church at two ends. Only the elderly would be seated while the rest of the audience would mill around in promenade fashion. The characters in the play would come on the platform or appear right next to the audience. The actors were playing roles of their ancestors or historical figures of their town. It was obvious that the people loved and supported this kind of theatre and the local bars, restaurants and hotels were providing sponsorship to the professionals. In the evening of the performance, the church was crowded with people. Community theatre has become an important part of their life.”

The “Eastern District Community Theatre Development Programme” by the Prospects Theatre Company was somewhat modeled after what was written above except that, in Hong Kong, people generally did not have very high consciousness about their community or local culture. There were also so many alternatives for leisure activities that the outcome of the community theatre projects had been quite different. However, the viability of such a development had been proven. (Hardy Tsoi, 1966)

By 2002, the “tailor-made” scripting method devised by Prospects Theatre for communities had undergone changes. Under a programme named “Grasshopper Outreach Youth and Children’s Theatre”, an artist facilitator would take a group of young people enthusiastic about the theatre to visit different sectors in the district, e.g. home for the elderly, boys and girls’ dormitories, temporary housing estates, etc. Eager eyes towards new people and things, “Dialogues” would easily be struck up between the young participants with and the various groups of unique life experience. Thus, through observation, interviews, discussion, creating and rehearsing, a play about society as observed by young people’s eyes was produced. It then went on tour in other districts and served as an example for other districts in self-reflection, reviews and further dislogue.

Some Issues Revolving Around Promotional Community Theatre
If an overall review of the community theatre model developed by Shatin Theatre Company and the Prospects Theatre Company is taken, it can be seen that its prime purpose is for theatre promotion. When arts and culture are still not generally recognized by society, this had its value. This is a problem and a challenge. The major difficulty faced by this kind of community theatre is that of the huge size of the community – in terms of the physical area, the size of the populations and its diversity. Therefore, constant adjustment had had to be made in order that the “invisible communities” might be reached. Theatre groups’ reliance on government funding, on the other hand, had greatly affected their survival, the mode of operation and the scale of their plans and programmes. In actual fact, almost all arts organizations require government funding. In tapping resources from the district boards, the proactive programme “Community Theatre Scheme for the 18 Districts” formulated by the Hong Kong Arts Development Council only met lukewarm response from the boards. This not only a reflects the lack of enthusiasm and support for arts and culture by the district boards but also implies that there should be more lobbying and educational work to be done. Apart from that, theatre training in Hong Kong has been geared mainly to stage productions. But the know-how and commitment required of a community theatre worker are quite different. Therefore, human resources and quality control are areas of concern as well.

Community Theatre for Social Change
Apart from community theatre that promotes the art form, there is also community theatre for social change. It has the following features:

1.  Theatre is considered as a tool that would liberate the creativity, the body and soul of the human kind.
2.  It tends more to work with minority and underprivileged groups. As the participants have similar background, the impact is usually larger.
3.  The relationship between the theatre worker and participants is different from the ordinary theatre in that it is more equal. Participants are both spectators and creators.

The representative of community theatre for change is the People’s Theatre group led by Mr. Mok Chiu Yu. Their development might be divided into two stages – the People’s Theatre in the 1980s and that of the 1990s. Influenced by the American radical “Living Theatre”, the People’s Theatre took part in performances, publications, making music cassette tapes and movie making. They did not perform in the usual venues of established theatres. Instead, they performed in the streets and in university campuses. Mok explained the rationale behind such activities,” We merely want to do things that the mass media do not or cannot do. We hope to communicate and act as a catalyst for social changes.” (Mok Chiu Yu, 1997). As to the effectiveness of this theatre operation, Mok had his reservations. He said, “What is political drama any way? Although one starts out trying to communicate, the audience would only endorse what they already believe and thus, only the solidarity of those sharing the same belief will be reinforced.” (Mok Chiu Yu 1997).

In the 1990s, Mok Chiu Yu et al came to know people’s theatres in Asia and Brazil and he revised his thoughts on “people’s theatre”. He wrote,
“What is people’s theatre then? People’s theatre is a kind of cultural action. It is theatre of the people, for the people and by the people. The purpose of people’s theatre is to allow the people themselves to alleviate themselves from two kinds of poverty. The first is connected with the mental and cultural... People’s theatre has empowering effects and is a means for empowerment. It leads to the gain of confidence within the people themselves and it allows them to utilise all the different artistic media to voice themselves, to critique and analyse their living conditions and to do what they feel they need to do, to change the unequal and unjust circumstances. People’s theatre promotes the practice of grass-root democracy and the realization of grass-root democracy will necessarily change the unequal distribution of wealth in society.” (Mok Chiu Yu, 1997)

It therefore should not be a surprise to find subsequently Mok Chiu Yu working for the Arts with the Disabled Association Hong Kong and founding the Asian People’s Theatre Festival Society.

As speaking out for the underprivileged and encouraging them to voice out are the basic goals of people’s theatre, “Playback Theatre” introduced by Veronica Needa, an ex-member of Chung Ying Theatre, in 1996 to Mok became an additional tool for people’s theatre. Playback Theatre since has grown by leaps and bounds and many names like “Well Drama Club”, “Chosen Power”, “Live @Life”, Michelle Chung, Grad Leung etc. have formed the backbone of the movement. Many social workers and organisations also used the same techniques to assist their work and the clients whom they served include the mentallly handicapped, youth out of school, new immigrants, migrant workers and other underprivileged groups. There are other young adults who have been attracted by the unique appeals of Playback Theatre to be enthusiastically involved, e.g. the Living Stories group.

Some Reflections on Community Theatre for Social Change
Since the Renaissance, western civilization has propounded humanism. Until the advent of the post industrial, post modern eras when society is being overwhelmed by the personal computers, the status of the individual has scaled new heights as society has become even more divisive. The theatre, being displaced by films and television into a minority interest, has gradually lost its educational and cohesive powers. Its justification for existence is further affected by a world of dangerous and unpredictable changes. Thus, community theatre for social change can be likened to social workers, who are always actively searching for soils worth ploughing, which is  a rare and honourable act indeed. However, if we were to take the following considerations into account, it might help in the course of community theatre for social change:
1.  The community theatre for social change is suspect of “preaching to the converted”, as its audience are like-minded. However, the answer lies in the keyword “change” as this is what the theatre aspires. From this, we may be able to relate ourselves to great speeches by political figures at public spaces and rallies. Does Agit Prop have a place in Hong Kong?
2.  The ideal theatre should have depth, and before depth, focus. Maybe the focus or issues in community theatre for social change is superficially simple and easy to be identified. But as the Chinese saying goes, “You are not a fish. So how do you know the fish’s concern?”, for the theatre worker is to find the issue and offer the right remedy, there must be thorough investigation and research. It is easy to whip up sentimentalism in a theatre, but follow -up action is what matters.
3.  The idea of empowerment seems to be in contradiction with the “from bottom to top” ideal model of community theatre for social change. Alternatively, if the deprived minority groups have the self knowledge and ability to organize and reform, they do not really need the existence of the community theatre worker. Therefore, the role of latter is rather intriguing; it requires remarkable skills and sincerity and it has to be pursued with humility and should therefore be much respected.
4.  Finally, there is the question of technique and content. Take “Playback Theatre” for example. It can be used to bring about social change but is also for entertainment. Nowadays many young people like to sing in karaoke and play electronic games, finding satisfaction and gratification of “being in control”. Be it community theatre or people’s theatre, the question of balance between content and technique should be addressed. Such theatre can be simply and economically produced in different touring environment but there is no reason to banish this type of theatre from main houses so that they can be seen by a larger audience under more favourable conditions. Successful examples can be found in Joan Littlewood’s “Oh! What a Lovely War” and the Asian People’s Theatre Festival Society’s “Macau 123” in 1998. Both shows were entertaining and thought provoking.

From “Celebration” to “Rebellion”
Famous theatre scholar Professor Robert W. Corrigan once pointed out: “There has always been a continuing tension between rebellion and celebration in the arts. “(Corrigan, 1973) This is also an appropriate comment for the community theatre, which is both celebratory and rebellious. Looking at the experience of Hong Kong, in the short span of the last twenty years, we have experienced community theatre which evolved from political street theatre, to promotional community theatre, people’s theatre including Playback Theatre and even educational theatre in schools. There will be greater and diversified developments in the days ahead.

Talking about future developments, the two-year old theatre group “Ying Sheung Chuk Theatre Company” provides an interesting example. The group is made up of two persons adapting an integration of styles from the physical theatre, masks, poetry, folksongs, glove puppetry, Chinese martial arts and other forms traceable to Chinese folklore. They first performed in the elderly and youth centres, facilitated mask workshops and performed in the community centres. They are educational and community-based as well as touring. Their sources of funding come primarily from the workshops they organise and performances, supported by the Lesiure and Cultural Services Department. Around Chinese New Year this year, the Comapny organised at the Yuen Long Theatre a “Feast of the Supreme Lions”, which included the making of lions for the traditional lion dance, the lion dance itself and percussion workshops. Its promotion took on the form of a menu of a Chinese banquet and was quite outstanding. There were students from two primary schools, one high school and members from a youth centre joining the performance. The audience was also invited to take part. The one hour performance had a great atmosphere and participants were very motivated. It is indeed very meaningful to carry out community theatre activities basing on folklore and traditional festivals. However, it is obvious that, without government funding support, the number of performances that “Ying Sheung Chuk Theatre Company” could do and its impact are necessarily restricted.

Serving the underprivileged and the deprived groups – whether it is to bring theatre to people living in distant places or to awaken the oppressed, has always been the goal of the community theatre. From a macro point of view, giants like Shakespeare, Moliere, Ibsen, Shaw and Brecht were just doing the same thing. In Hong Kong, the total number of theatre goers amounts to somewhere between 40,000 and 50,000 (3). So even if performances are many, the social impact is not particularly high. Therefore, the theatre may be considered to be a minority which has to work hard for its survival. Take for an example in the Hong Kong Arts Centre forum on “Searching for Hong Kong’s Theatre: Revelations from Kuo Po Kun” on 9th February, one of the concerns with Hong Kong theatre raised was the over emphasis on theatricality and its lack of cultural depth. Owing to the goals and mode of operation of the community theatre, it  can definitely contribute much towards this end. Community Theatre in Hong Kong has a history of twenty years. Further formal research and study will be the way forward for this art form.

Notes:
1.  Since 1993, the Prospects Theatre Company had for four consecutive years received funding from the Hong Kong Arts Development Council to run “ Theatre Development Programme on Hong Kong Island East”, “Theatre Development Programme at Tusen Wan and Kwai Ching”, “Community Theatre Development Programme in Tuen Mun” and “Theatre Development Programme in Northern District, New Territories.” Apart from the above, Prospect Theatre Company has been repeatedly commissioned by the Leisure and Cultural Services Department to undertake various Cultural Ambassador Scheme and Artists in Residence Scheme.
2.  “The Grasshopper Outreach Youth and Children’s Theatre” is part of Prospects Theatre’s “ Insects’ Playground – Community Integrated Arts Programme”. The programme came under the Leisure and Cultural Services Department Cultural Ambassador Scheme 2002.
3.  Hardy Tsoi conducted surveys on theatre performances and audience in 1989, 1990 and 1991. Taking 1991 as an example, there were 82 Chinese theatre groups performing 173 plays in 764 performances. Total audience was 250,000. On average every person sees six performances and the number of theatre goers should be aound 40,000. Separately in a publication “Hong Kong’s Theatre Scene 360 Degrees” edited by Mr. Ting Yu (published by the Hong Kong section of the International Association of Theatre Critics, it was reported that in 1997/98, there were 178 plays with 1010 performances staged. There was a total of 310,000 number of viewers. Calculated on the same basis as before, there would be about 50,000 theatre goers.

References:
Yu Sau (1987) (Preface) [Elections – A Negation – Collected Plays of People’s Theatre] (page 6) Hong Kong People’s Association

Hardy Tsoi (1996) [Community Art and it Space for Survival] (Sing Tao Daily News) 27th March 1996

Da Shan (1987) [A Community Theatre in Hong Kong 1] in [Elections – A Negation – Collected Plays of People’s Theatre] (pages 155m 156)  Hong Kong People’s Association

Mok Chiu Yu (1997) [The Political Nature of Theatre and People’s Theatre] in [Hong Kong Theatre – Recordings of Seminars on Theatre 1997] (pages 116, 118) Hong Kong , Hong Kong Section of International Association of Theatre Critics.

Corrigan, Robert W. (1973) “The Theatre in Search of A Fix (pg 348) USA: Dell Publishing Co. Inc. 


(此為莫昭如主辦社區劇場研討會之主題演講英譯本。譯者不詳。中文本在另一刋物登出時改名為:《發展弱勢社群的社區劇場本身就是弱勢社群》。)










2013年4月5日 星期五

問題依舊,出路不同


曹禺戲劇節研討會

問題依舊,出路不同                                     蔡錫昌

經典作品之所以能成為經典,是因為經典作品中的普世性題材,經得起時間的考驗,歷久常新。應該說的是,經典作品的生命力,乃在於內容主旨,而並非外在風格。然而,因為時代意識形態的改變,客觀環境的不同,當藝術家搬演戲劇經典作品的時候,往往會考慮採用一些新手法,好讓今天的觀眾更容易接受經典作品。說到底,現代藝術家不是歷史學家,他只能以現在的眼光去演譯經典,而並非進行歷史考證。亦為了這個「藝術牌照」,經典作品得以歷久不衰,以不同的姿態出現在觀眾眼前。

曹禺三部曲的《雷雨》、《日出》和《原野》到今天依然是充滿著生命力的作品,因為他們描寫、鞭撻的社會人心的醜惡依然存在,甚或因為客觀環境變異而醜惡顯得「基因變異」。以《雷雨》一劇為例,北京導演王曉鷹,在曹禺的同意下,曾把魯大海一角從演出本中刪掉。社會階級鬥爭減弱所換來的效果,是更加專注家庭倫理的扭曲關係,人性的醜惡也更為暴露了。當年香港演藝學院戲劇學院院長蔣維國博士以劇場風格處理,全劇的演員都坐在佈景兩側,增加了劇場的間離感,目的,不外乎希望多用批叛眼光來檢視劇情。因為一些經典作品的篇幅比較長,難以全本照演;以莎士比亞為例,他五幕的劇本除非經過刪減,否則今天的觀眾均無法把戲看完!可是,出自對原著的尊重,這些修改只是刪剪而沒有增加,於是並沒有把原著歪曲。至於一些改編作品,演出內容與原著大異其趣。那只能算是由原著啟發的一種創作而已。以下談到的「新手法」,可沒有離開曹禺原著主旨的意圖。

《雷雨》實在是一個太出名的劇本,大家對它都耳熟能詳。一些對《雷雨》的批評,是它太過「佳構」。基於以上兩點,現代導演(或後現代)可以把《雷雨》解構重組,於是,透過種種不同的手法,譬如重複劇情、倒敘、獨白、視象蒙太奇等等,佳構變為解構劇,或許對於劇中某些角色或者情節而言,會有更透徹的解讀。舉例來說,傳統的周樸園是個外表道貌岸然、內裡蠻橫專制的資本家,是個徹頭徹尾的大壞蛋。可是,他對侍萍當年的一片真心、今天的一點懷念難道不可以為他「挽回」一些分數?如果加重了他的深情,就會同時加強了他的薄倖。為周樸園說項,這樣也有點兒好像為《威尼斯商人》的Shylock翻案的味道了。

《雷雨》一劇其實也可以用性別研究的角度詮釋。由這樣角度的詮釋自然會導致結構上的「手術」和風格上的適應。一套現代版的《雷雨》,絕對可以影射現今社會上那些常常在報紙娛樂版出現,擁有三妻四妾的名人、富豪,使他們成為被批評、嘲笑的對像。這方面,一些電視節目如《頭條新聞》和《香港亂嗡》其實已經是先例可援了。

無論在內容上或意象上,《日出》一劇更容易接受風格化的處理。在強烈的光暗對比、漫畫化的角色造型、天堂與地獄式的貧富懸殊、善與惡的角力之中,存在著一個遊離於正邪之間的陳白露。她的犬儒和冷嘲熱諷,相對著方達生的書獃子式的呢喃,引致強烈而可笑的對比。時代變了,價值觀也隨之而變;在這個笑貧不笑娼的社會,陳白露自有她一套應付這個變態社會的對策。早上太陽出來了,她雖然有過一瞬間輕生之念,但最終,她決定重新整裝上路,繼續與這醜惡的世界周旋!

《原野》是三部曲之中更圓熟和最具藝術野心的一部。一方面情節嚴守三一律,而另一方面,寫實的第一、二幕是心理戲劇,而在第三幕的黑森林,作者卻採取表現主義風格,以影、音的效果刻劃出主角的主觀感受。為了手刃仇人後代,主角仇虎耽誤了逃生的機會。結果,黃金鋪的地方去不了,黑林子卻成為他葬身之所。於是,「黃金地」、「黑林子」是劇本層出不窮而又相輔相成的意像,是醜惡的現實與美滿生活的願景之間的競爭。本劇可以考慮不用實景;焦家的場景如果在金碧滿目的場景中進行,是一個不錯的對照,好像在說:「美滿已是現狀,仇恨已是回憶」一樣。再者,場景如果隨時可以變調,改為詭秘黑色森林的意像,又或者兩種主調各佔一部份,隨著場景氣氛而或多或少變化,那麼,整齣劇的設計都以表現主義手法包裝,與文本的意圖配合了。達致如此場景流動地變換的,可有不同的方法,譬如燈光很重要,投射器材也是。可能比較具革命性的,其實是需要一個能夠虛懷若谷,同時裝載任何意像的空台。

以上是一些概念性的構思,從戲劇結構、當代性社會思維和劇場美學三方面,為曹禺先生的三部曲提供一些現代劇場的可能性。希望拋磚引玉,請大家參考、指正!


15.10 2010

2013年4月4日 星期四

17 Quotable Quotes


Everything in nature is lyrical in its ideal essence, tragic in its fate and comic in its existence.                                George Santayana

The winds of acclamation and dissent pass, but if the relationships and techniques respond to our own inner values, to our mythologies and superstitions, then they are able to oppose resistance, to come into contact with the outside and to escape isolation.           Eugenio Barba (Artistic Director, Odin Teatret)

If we, citizens, do not support our artists, then we sacrifice our imagination on the altar of reality and we end up believing in nothing and having worthless dreams.
                                                                                  Yann Martel (From Author's Notes, Life of Pi)



Sir Thomas More: I think that when statesmen forsake their own private conscience for the sake of their public duties, they lead their country by a short route to chaos. ……我相信, 當政治家為咗執行公務而離棄佢地個人嘅道德……佢地會將國家引導到紛亂嘅路途上面。


Sir Thomas More: Why not be a teacher? You'd be a fine teacher; perhaps a great one. 點解唔做一名教師呢?你可以成為一個好好嘅教師, 甚至一個偉大嘅教師
Richard Rich: If I was, who would know it? 就算我成為一個偉大嘅教師, 又會有邊個知道?
Sir Thomas More: You; your pupils; your friends; God. Not a bad public, that.
你自己, 你嘅學生, 你嘅朋友, 上帝D觀眾唔差吖……,
_________________________
Sir Thomas More: Why Richard, it profits a man nothing to give his soul for the whole world... but for Wales? 威爾殊? , Richard, 為咗整個世界而出賣靈魂本來已經得唔到好處….. 但係只係為咗威爾殊  !
                             ________________________

                                                           From  Robert Bolt's A Man For All Seasons



People are often unreasonable and self-centered. Forgive them anyway.
If you are kind, people may accuse you of ulterior motives. Be kind anyway.
If you are honest, people may cheat you. Be honest anyway.
If you find happiness, people may be jealous. Be happy anyway.
The good you do today may be forgotten tomorrow. Do good. Give the world the best you have and it may never be enough. Give your best anyway.
For you see, in the end, it is between you and God. It was never between you and them anyway.
                                                                     Mother Teresa of Calcutta 
                                                                                                                                  

如果我們不是追求原創,何必要來搞藝術?
如果我們不學古今的經典,我們怎麼知道自己的是原創?
如果我們不站在巨人的肩膀上,怎麼可能看得遠?
如果我們不想超越,何必要攀登?
如果我們沒有紀律、沒有決心、沒有奉獻,
我們怎可以想象“藝術是人類自由的終極自由空間
                                                                                              
Without the urge for originality, what's the point of artistic pursuits?
Without learning from the classics, how do we know we are original?
 Without emulating the achievements of great men, how do we envision the future?
Without the desire to transcend, why do we need to scale heights?
Without discipline, determination and devotion, how do we imagine that "art offers the space of ultimate freedom in the pursuit of human liberty?"
                                                                                     郭寶崑 Kuo Pao Kun



「當上帝看見凡人不自量力企圖創作,他就笑了!」

                                                                                    取自米蘭、昆德拉接受「耶路撒冷獎」致詞


Romeo     If I profane with my unworthiest hand
                This holy shrine, the gentler sin is this;
                My lips, two blushing pilgrims, ready stand
                To smooth that rough touch with a tender kiss.

Juliet         Good pilgrim, you do wrong your hand too much,
                 Which mannerly devotion shows in this.
                 For saints have hands that pilgrims' hands do touch,
                 And palm to palm is holy palmers' kiss. 

                                                                              Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet Act I Sc. 5 l. 92-99


悲劇是關於偉大狀況與想法的劇場,這是一種探索永恆人性需求與疑惑的劇場,有著崇高動力的劇場。

                                                           希臘阿提斯劇院創辦人  特爾左布勒斯

                                                                           

How long 
Do works endure? As long 
As they are not completed.
Since as long as they demand effort
They do not decay.
                                                                                                               Bertolt Brecht


The actors
Change into singers. They have a new attitude
As they address themselves to the audience, still
Characters in the play but now also undisguisedly
Accomplices of the playwright.
                                                                                                              Bertolt Brecht


A carnival is not a revolution.
After the carnival, after the removal of the masks,
you are precisely who you were before. After
the tragedy, you are not certain who you are.
                                                                         Howard Barker


你若是鳥
僅僅是隻鳥
迎風而起
率性而飛
眼睜睜
俯視人間
這一片混沌
飛越泥沼
於煩惱之上
了無目的
自在而消遙
                                                                          高行健


戲劇是「澄明的眼睛,一雙冷眼,冷靜觀照這大千世界的眾生相」。 
                                                                           高行健  


If Chaplin were to play Napoleon, he wouldn't even look like him; he would show objectively and critically how Napoleon would behave in the various situations the author might put him in.

                                                                          Bertolt Brecht  


I abhor dramatic schools that indulge in reflections and introspections to evoke the right emotion. The mere fact that a student must be mentally operated upon is sufficient proof that he should give up acting.   

                                                                         Charlie Chaplin 


好景龜年惜落英,聽歌新譜早忘兵;
排雲獨手前賢志,砥礪河山孰有成。

                                                                                                              南海十三郎 












《四季人》的二類半劇場


《四季人》的二類半劇場                                      
1982年,由筆者翻譯及導演的英國名劇A Man For All Seasons,稱之為《四季人》,在香港中文大學新落成的邵逸夫堂上演,是為此劇中文版的首演。在二十六年後的今天,筆者有緣把《四季人》介紹給新一代的觀眾,實在是一件榮幸和有意義的事。當年的演出由袁報華飾演主角湯馬士爵士,馮祿德飾演卡維爾,白耀燦飾演普通人,人選一時無兩,而演出風格是英國十六世紀的歷史劇。
時光荏苒,筆者的藝術認知亦有所不同,以下段落是這次重排《四季人》的一些美學考慮。
根據當代戲劇大師,丹麥奧汀劇場藝術總監巴爾巴(Eugenio Barba) 的分析,劇場可分成三類:第一類是蓬勃但藝術性卻暮氣沉沉的商業及政府資助劇團,第二類是導演中心、視演員如傀儡的前衛劇場,第三類劇場則為觀眾提供具有內在生命力的訊息,以喚起觀者的集體潛意識為目的。巴爾巴師承「貧窮劇場」創辦人告羅多斯基(Grotowski),藝術概念與乃師一脈相承,對演員而言,要求的並非依書直說,按劇本照演什麼名角哈姆雷特或者娜拉,而是要演員以本身價值觀與角色印證,甚或自己進行創作,不作編劇家的「奴隸」。「第三類劇場」對創作者的挑戰,就是由主觀出發,創作出能被接受的客觀意象劇場。英國學者James Roose –Evans認為當演員個人真理與經驗落差—即演員/角色的合併體—呈現的時候,觀眾得窺生命較深層的剖析。筆者曾於前年遠赴丹麥參與由巴爾巴主持的奧汀劇場十天的工作坊,遍賞該團名劇(差不多每晚均有演出)。奧汀劇場的演員大多追隨巴爾巴大半生,演出效果對筆者而言,雖然有文化及語言的差異,但仍覺得極具魅力。
由「第三類劇場」而來的啟發,並不僅在於演員的創意和發揮,事實上,對於作為負責「二度詮釋」的導演,也有不少的釋放。隨著近世優秀劇本的難求,編創劇場的興起和上述實驗性導演的出現,現代劇場大有「導演主導」的趨向。然而,經典劇依然是「主流劇場」(筆者不想沿用巴爾巴商業或資助劇場的界定)的中流砥柱,而導演的創意,在這類劇場當中,仍可大施拳腳。筆者認為,舞台上的「歷史」都是想像中的歷史,而這個「想像」,就是根據創作者(包括導演)的文化背景、理性與情感的取向,以及詮釋角度而定。所以,每當演繹一部名著或經典作品之時,導演就好像與之「對話」,借古喻今也好,借題發揮也好,這就是他的「藝術牌照」,而外在的或視覺上的歷史考據已不重要!
《四季人》原著寫於1960年,作者Robert Bolt原屬左翼份子,所以,他沿用了當年仍是方興未艾的布萊希特「間離劇場」風格,以配合文以載道的題材,實在是順理成章的。「間離劇場」風格在《四季人》一劇中,主要是透過一個飾演不同角色的「普通人」來體現;此角色以庸俗的眼光和市民趣味的插科打諢,直接與觀眾溝通,也賺取他們的歡心。在編者的設計中,觀眾對普通人的接受或認同是屬於一種收編,在戲劇的語言來說,普通人和觀眾就成為聖人(即Sir Thomas More)的襯托,而觀眾(或某些觀眾)會因此而開始進行反思。
當筆者選演《四季人》的時候,希望向參演者和觀眾提出一個問題,那就是:「今天的香港會如何看待像湯馬士摩亞的這樣一個偉人?」劇中的名句「Every man has his price」放諸四海皆準,但見怪不怪的香港人是否會嗤之以鼻?再者,高官政治「秀」和Infotainment充斥香港社會,甚麼聖人是否只是另一場熱鬧?好像翻閱「八卦雜誌」上富貴派對的潮人男女,一頁尚未過去,一切影像都經已模糊了?基於上述的考慮,在筆者2008年版本的《四季人》中,將會出現一個「形上劇場」,以戲「包」戲:一群2008年的香港中外潮人男女,說著五種語言,參加一個富貴派對,《四季人》的故事變成了他們的噱頭、玩意。對號入座大可不必,但如果這演繹能夠喚起觀眾某些集體記憶,也是不枉的!
上文提到「第三類劇場」可以引導觀眾得窺生命較深刻的剖析,其所達到的效果,如戲劇大師布魯克(Peter Brook)所言,一種奇蹟似的優美時刻,深深地感動觀眾,全劇院會鴉雀無聲;劇場再也不是無關痛癢的娛樂,劇場可以影響生活和生命。筆者深信這個境界,乃是所有劇場的最終目的。以《四季人》原著情理並茂及其思想與藝術深度,堪稱是一代經典,而以觀眾的慧悟和情操,現在「二類半劇場」式的一些後現代劇場手法,也許只是聊備一格而已!

《四季人演出於2008年12月香港大會堂劇院


                                   

四川、站起來、組曲


四川、站起來、組曲

成都機場雖然沒有北京、上海等大機場的繁忙,但地方寬敞清潔,同樣的現代化。成都當然是四川省的省會,十分繁華。華西的電子大企業長虹公司的總部設於綿陽市,是以該市也是中產富裕。上述兩個城市的市容都十分良好。從成都到綿陽的公路兩旁,都是綠油油的稻田,一望無際,加上一排排的有點兒像義大利郊野的栢樹,而農莊的樓房也不特別有中國傳統色彩,真有點到了歐洲的感覺。

以上是筆者參加了六月底,香港中文大學逸夫書院暑期四川服務團的一些初步觀感。對一個第一次到四川的訪客來說,頗超乎想像,而心中略有忐忑,到底到了地震災區的北川擂鼓鎮時,當地的面貌又會有怎樣的改變呢?

車子轉入北川的路段,路面依然寬闊,偶爾不平或裂開的地方,看來是地震的後遺。兩旁重建的項目頗多,都是農舍為主:白白的牆加上褐色屋頂,每間的間格不一,而窗子外都有一個傳統式樣的木雕窗花,整齊而好看。另外有三項矚目的景物,一是口號旗海,二是險峻的山勢與塌方,三是漫天的沙塵。「濟南擂鼓一家親」、「感謝祖國、感謝山東」說明了哪個省份和哪個城市是資助重建的單位。「北川安昌小學祝大家一生平安」來得沒有政治味道,反似出自學生的手筆。越接近北川,山勢越發險要,塌方很多。從一些空中拍攝的照片早已看過,千萬噸的巨石滾下,弱小的山下村莊、城鎮真個是如摧枯拉朽,可怕之情,不敢想像!因為沿途重建項目多,水泥廠也有數間,加上天時暑熱而無雨,窗外都是灰濛濛的。最後,見到由楊尚昆款識的牌匾「大禹故里」,北川擂鼓鎮終於到了!

服務團來擂鼓鎮的目的有四:1. 教小學生英語,2. 到臨時安置區家訪,3. 為當地羌族人士作醫療檢查,4. 為小學老師作應付壓力的心理講座。筆者尚有一個個人的目的,那就是為了自己編導的舞台劇《四川組曲》作實地考察。

本身在地震中死去一雙子女(少數民族容許多生一名孩子)的校長表面看來沒有傷痛的感覺,在殷勤的接待中,覺到他們這個當橱窗(Showcase)的學校,實在已習慣了不同的訪客。去年十二月沈祖堯院長和簡麗嫦主任首探擂鼓鎮小學時,只是一個臨時的校舍,設備簡陋。如今,僅僅六個月的光景,一座花了三千萬人民幣的全新校舍已然落成(對面馬路還有一所中學),不可同日而語!校長對教授英語的要求很簡單,就是日常的問候語,這樣是否可以讓他們的學生應付一些外國的訪客?至於家訪,校長也小心提點,說千萬不要勾起區民的傷心事。安置區內居民來自不同的受災區,品流複雜,同時蘊藏了不少的社區問題。所以,大家都顯得小心。

安置區裡有一所由香港玩具廠商會捐建的「全人健康中心」,由中大醫學院胡志遠教授負責的身體檢查就是在那裡舉行的。在中心的另一邊,見到許多羌族婦女在進行刺綉的活兒。原來她們的製成品都由一間公司拿去集中發售,聽說這方法是由一個香港的社福界團體建議開辦的。羌族的刺綉饒有特色,尤其使人欣慰的是這種自食其力的精神。在這臨時的社區中,我們還見到網吧、露天咖啡啤酒座、小型飯店、士多、果菜攤和熟食檔,還見到一個「預訂生日蛋糕」的招牌。聽說廣場上每晚黃昏婦女們都在這裡跳舞自娛,終歸歌舞是羌民的主要風俗。稍為抬頭一望,只見排屋屋頂有衛星訊號接收器和太陽熱能板。街道上小孩子玩著百多元的美式滑板。大約五米多丁方的安置區單位大多有家電,但屋子裡沒窗,電風扇要不停的轉,主人和訪客都汗如雨下。

面對有基本生活條件而生氣盎然的小社區,同時惦記著校長叮囑的服務團五個分組,在進行家訪時都難以啟齒,倒反是居民多時主動提出家裡受災、死難的一些資訊。這些,卻被他們面上掛著的笑容而淡化。似乎居民目前的窘境是天旱缺水,而長遠來說,是何時再獲安置上樓居住。礙於禮貌和時間,各分組得到的恐怕只是片面的資訊,尚需同學們共同編織出一個比較立體的圖像。我們離開的時候,不論帶著一種生活如常的感覺,或許對災民將來出路的問號,都難免會感知到他們頑強的生命力,也許出自聽天由人的無奈。相反,我們香港人是多麼的幸福?多麼受寵?筆者對服務團同學的熱心和成熟的表演感到自豪,深信這次旅程會帶給他們心靈上很大的收穫。

擂鼓鎮小學的孩子歡笑聲震天價響,同學們寓教語文於遊戲的方法很管用:我們第五分組利用四川特色的辣椒來教 Hot, Hotter The hottest;大部份分組都在教 Old MacDonald Has a Farm的兒歌,既可以學英文,又有可以表演的活動!最後一天聯歡會過後,許多孩子都依依不捨、眼泛淚光的拖著大哥哥、大姐姐說再見。對於這些已經習慣了「來賓」的孩子,我們這些「過客」可以為他們帶來甚麼?此外,同行的心理學梁耀堅教授說,他覺察到一些依然不大活躍的小朋友,他們有可能是一些「隱藏的病例」,還需長時間的輔導或援助。從這次考察所見,實在有不少熱心的社福界單位、義工在運作;義工的性質大都短暫,要有長期的服務機構,才能發揮到較大的援助力量。服務團在成都的時候,曾探訪過由威爾斯醫院陳啟明教授發起的慈善機構「站起來」所營辦的川港康復中心,幫助的都是一些地震截肢的受災者,還看過她們表演娛賓的節目,心裡十分感動。在《四川組曲》早期的資料搜集當中,舉家曾到陳家壩服務三個月的黃兆邦醫生曾對筆者說,援助是一項長期的工作,金錢以外,如何進入受災、受創人的心靈,重燃他們對生命的信心和希望,是最具難度的!

在擂鼓鎮接待我們的老師當中,有人主動訴說一些受災的慘況。其中一位老師對筆者說,當局對許多在地震中死難的老師都追封為烈士,但某某中學的老師卻得不到這項榮譽。該校校長的兒子本來已獲接納來港升讀大學,但可惜也在地震中喪生。對此,那位老師還說了一個「該!」字。對這些未能實證的評述,筆者只能姑妄聽之,但也難免引起種種聯想,譬如「豆腐渣」校舍的問題等等。在擂鼓鎮期間,筆者也曾目睹兩個團體到該地「參觀」,其中一個是由公安開路、汽車窗門都貼上深色反光貼的官家車隊。的確,北川擂鼓鎮這個救災成績的橱窗,重建項目和臨時安置都走上軌道,但是否可以以偏概全?

受災重點的北川縣城離擂鼓鎮安置區不遠,坐車只是大概八分鐘之遙。奇怪的是要服務團經數次交涉才獲「批准」到那裡參觀。當抵達時發覺並沒有什麼關卡或保安設施,只是進入縣城的路的確已然封閉,我們一行人要沿另一條車路徒步上半山,在山遙望在山谷已成廢墟的縣城。沿途有很多擺賣地震錄像、紀念品和土產的攤檔,就像許多旅遊觀光點一樣。到了山,還可以買到供拜祭的香燭,亦有人提供免費而質素不佳的望遠鏡給「遊客」觀望。有兩位本身就是四川人的中大同學,一邊聽一位當小販的婆婆說話時一邊流淚,原來婆婆說她的孫女兒在地震中去世了,她每天在此擺賣,就好像在遙望著孫女兒一樣。翻閱所售賣的圖片冊或錄像,許多都沒有印明誰是出版者。圖片冊採取「事前、事後」的對照,而竟然有以災區景象印製的明信片售賣!後來從錄像所見,的確有許多外地傳媒不能以第一時間拍攝的片段,珍貴之餘,其血肉模糊的內容令人不安。香港記者在報導地震的時候,有人曾有「販賣悲情」的職業道德的考慮。這裡所見種種,恐怕是另一種商業行為和文化差異的表現;中國人是一個多災多難的民族,但向人展示災難的方法和程度,都是值得商榷的。這就跟香港某些報紙,以色彩繽紛的圖片去報導交通意外或死傷情況一樣!

在香港舞台劇產業化發展高唱入雲,而內容無法不遷就大眾娛樂口味的時候,劇場需要保持多元化,而其紀事、評述、反省和深化的功能更需堅持。筆者四川之行之前,《四川組曲》的前期劇本只是一種遙距的「香港想像」。現在,距離已是縮近,對焦更加清晰。然而,地震的悲慘和發人深省的故事何其多,《四川組曲》無法亦不會包羅萬有,只是希望在某些層面上,與觀眾分享一些對生命的思考和頌歌。為了進一步實踐劇場對社會的參與和承擔,《四川組曲》在八月十九日最後一場演出的票款,減除少量行政費用之後將捐贈「站起來」機構,希望能有助他們繼續營辦康復中心,也算代表觀眾對這有意義的事工,略表支持!

 《四川組曲》編導  蔡錫昌

《四川組曲》由眾劇團製作於2009年8月藝穗會小劇場上演


奧汀劇團和「奧汀周」


奧汀劇團和「奧汀周」                                   蔡錫昌

二零零七年八月,筆者踏上了一個難忘的旅程——到丹麥參加由當代大師尤真里奧‧巴爾巴 (Eugenio Barba) 主持的奧汀劇團的「奧汀周」。巴爾巴是「貧窮劇場」始創人告羅多斯基 (Grotowski) 的弟子。筆者對「貧窮劇場」有一定的嚮往,一九九六年的編導作品《苦山行》(1)中所採取的風格,就是「貧窮劇場」。有機會親炙大師的風範和教導,一定有好處。況且,筆者還希望在不久的將來,導演高行健的《山海經傳》(2),得要好好的把自己準備一下。

關於這個旅程,要多謝香港演藝學院戲劇學院院長蔣維國博士的推介。他本人參加過「奧汀周」的活動,亦多次跟筆者說及巴爾巴的事跡。二零零年三月,當戲劇學院頒發榮譽博士學位給巴爾巴的時候,筆者與「香港戲劇工程」同事方梓勳教授一同出席盛會。趁此良機,梓勳兄邀請巴爾巴為本學刋供稿 ,巴爾巴一口應承,亦已兌現(3)。

奧汀劇團位於丹麥西北近海的小鎮 Holstebro,人口只有五萬,從首都哥本哈根要乘四小時火車才到達。一九六四年,巴爾巴因不獲挪威政府接納在當地成立劇團,遂召集一批不被奧斯陸演藝學院錄取的演員,組成奧汀劇團 (Odin Teatret)4)。兩年後,丹麥Holstebro市政府邀請奧汀劇團進駐該鎮,給他們提供一個舊農莊作為團址。那時候,巴爾巴已完成了跟隨告羅多斯基三年的學徒經歷,也剛從印度見識了 Kathakali 的戲劇回來。結果,Holstebro市政府的邀請証明是一個明智的決定,因為奧汀劇團的存在,本來已日漸破落的小鎮回復了生氣,居民逐漸增多,處處充滿了藝術氣息。

聰明的巴爾巴在追求劇場的藝術性之餘,尚懂得戲劇溶入生活的道理。所以,奧汀劇團在Holstebro,除了搞演出和成立一個戲劇實驗室外,還為該鎮籌辦藝術節、巡遊和 「戲劇交易廣場」(Theatre Barter)。這些親民的活動大受歡迎,據紀錄片所見,藝術節規模龐大,連軍隊也出動坦克車來 「助陣」!筆者參加「奧汀周」尾聲的時候,來自許多國家的參加者以己國或民族的技藝(5)與當地團體交流觀摩,一團是 Holstrbro的長者,他們領導大家跳土風舞,另一組是小學生表演體操。巴爾巴告訴參加者,「戲劇交易廣場」的概念,來自一次奧汀在義大利一處窮鄉僻壤的巡迴;當地人沒錢買門票,於是巴爾巴索性不收取費用,以表演相互交換,大家樂也融融。其實,「戲劇交易廣場」的背後,有著一種藝術民主化的理念,藝術並非高高在上,遙不可及,而且,藝術家和民眾的地位是平等的!

Holstrbro奧汀的大本營也充滿著民主自由的氣氛,甚至有公社的風格。首先,奧汀的演員什麼也幹,他們的房屋是自己蓋的,飯餐、打掃等雜務,大家都要分工。參加這次 「奧汀周」來自世界各地的五十人,每人同樣需要負責安排早餐、洗厠所等工作。筆者感到十分榮幸,被分配每天午飯後洗抹樓梯,因為這樓梯是通往巴爾巴和告羅多斯基的房間(6)!

「奧汀周」的長度其實是八天,加上最初的報到、安頓和最後的撤離,一共是十天。這一周的活動十分豐富:早上八點晨操,然後是一連串的講座、工作坊、示範和排練,下午和晚上都有演出和錄象放映。晚上的演出都是公演,有不少當地居民前來欣賞。這一周的感受良多,其中最顯著之一是「慷慨」,正如巴爾巴的得力助手 Roberta Carreri 說,他們一眾奧汀人員,包括巴爾巴本人,都把自己所識和經驗,無私的與參加者分享。以筆者的理解,演出是他們研究的成果,而演出必需分享、研究則不能間斷。巴爾巴在奧汀的實驗工作坊,名叫 「戲劇人類學國際中心」International School of Theatre Anthropology。此外,巴爾巴也成立了 「歐亞戲劇大學」University of Eurasian Theatre 結集世界各地的藝術家和學者共事。奧汀總部有一個資料豐富的圖書館,可惜「奧汀周」節目豐富,筆者未能詳覽細閱一番。結果,他們的書店成為了該周參加者常到之處,而且個個滿載而歸,行李的重量肯定增加不少!奧汀劇團的規模不算很大,但事事俱全,特別值得留意的,是該處設施都開放給人使用,「奧汀周」期間所見,有來自不同國家的青年藝術工作者,在那裡一邊做研究,一邊做義工,也參加 「奧汀周」的活動,大家打成一片。

在「奧汀周」期間,參加者總共欣賞了不下六個演出,包括大型的、曾來港演出的 《鯨魚骨架之內》 (Inside the Skelton of a Whale)7)和較近期的作品 《安徒生的夢》(Anderson’s Dream)。奧汀的演員大概只有十人,能夠上演保留劇目的原因,是因為這些演員大多由奧汀創團的時間,已開始追隨巴爾巴。筆者曾與其中一位演員 Tage Larsen交談,發現原來他也曾離開奧汀,到其他劇團工作,但最後還是「回巢」 到奧汀去。奧汀的演員來自世界各地,巴西舞者Augusto Omolu 是比較年輕的一位(由他領導的晨操可真要命!),但是其他人的年齡,都是六十歲左右。然而,白髮如銀、年已七十有一的巴爾巴體態卻不比年輕人遜色!筆者問他當一眾奧汀人年華老去之際,奧汀劇團有什麼打算?這問題換來的是一陣爽朗的笑聲和一個轄達的答案:「沒有!就讓事情自然地發展吧!」

筆者上述的問題並非感情用事,也非無的放矢。巴爾巴一生的藝術追求:演員的創造語言 (Actor’s scenic language) 源遠流長,可上朔至二十世紀初,被史坦尼斯拉夫斯基譽為唯一繼承人的梅爾荷德。梅氏提倡 「生物機械論」(Biomechanics),探討由外至內,强調形體、動作的訓練。簡要來說,梅氏認為:「演員透過純粹生理的方法去燃點一種情緒上的反應。」他的愛徒 Igor Ilinski
曾經以 「演員—藝術家—思想家」來形容這樣的一個表演者: 「思想令到他採取一個哀愁的姿勢,這個姿勢令到他感到哀愁;思想令到他走動,而走動就令他產生恐懼。」(8)梅爾荷德的理論,到了波蘭告羅多斯基的手上,發展成為以演員為表演中心的「貧窮劇場」。巴爾巴既是告氏弟子,形體劇場的風格是一脈相承的;從紀錄片所見,年輕時期的 Tage Larsen 的訓練,差不多可以與奧林匹克運動員相比,但當演員年事已長,體力不支的時候,還可以演形體劇場嗎?當然,奧汀演員的運動、雜耍和小丑的功底仍在,只是他們已經另覓蹊徑,創建了自己的一套方法。以下,是筆者在 「奧汀周」所見所習,回港後亦曾多次在工作坊與演員分享、實驗,頗為有效:

1.      演員二人一組,以不同的方式試行拉、推和擁抱三個動作。
2.      三個動作再分以大力、普通力度和互相距離大約三吋的 「意思動作」。
3.      三個動作乘以三種力度,已有九個變化。演員反覆練習。
4.      演員個別練習。
5.      動作要清晰,身體要猶如把空氣劈開一樣。
6.      動作結束之時,身體保持平衡,轉向。
7.      選取一段台詞,開始無意識地配以動作,尋找兩者之間的關係。
8.      慢慢地,動作與台詞之間會產生一種有機的關係。
9.      如果動作變化不夠,可以從其他源頭,例如圖片、雜誌、生活中擷取。

在筆者的工作坊中,常用的台詞是李白的詩句「床前明月光,疑是地上霜,舉頭望明月,低頭思故鄉。」,往往有非凡的效果。另一次,一個演員在重複 「褶衣」的動作時,突然悲從中來;原來,她記起了替去世的外婆收拾遺物的情況。我國大導演、北京人民藝術劇院院長焦菊隱先生排演名劇 《龍鬚溝》的時候,指導由名演員于是之老師所飾演的程瘋子,在他樂極忘形的時候,加上一個大轉身,於是,該節表演便得以畫龍點睛了。焦先生常常要求演員留意「台詞以外的動作」,道理和巴爾巴的如出一轍!

當然,奧汀劇團的製作與別不同之處,是他們富於舞台意象、音樂與形體並茂而饒有詩意的演出。奧汀演員在巴爾巴的訓練和熏陶下,十八般武藝件件皆能,也包括音樂,甚至研製樂器,所以,他們都有强烈的個人風格。更甚的是,奧汀演員已臻個別創作的境界,他們如果有什麼意念,在巴爾巴同意下可以自行創作,而巴爾巴實際上成為了他們的 戲劇指導 Dramaturge)。如果作品尚未成熟,巴爾巴不會讓作品上演。因此,創作過程可達三數年之久。雖然這種創作的方式頗為費時,但自由開明的作風,對藝術的自信和忠誠,以至那種藝術的所有性 Ownership)和品牌,都是無可比擬的。

奧汀劇團選取這種藝術路線,固然與巴爾巴的藝術觀有關。英國評論家 James Roose-Evans這樣分析巴爾巴:他把劇場分為三類,第一類是商業劇場和受資助劇場,雖然大為興旺,藝術上卻暮氣沉沉。前衛劇場是第二類,在這劇場中,導演不理演員的元素,只顧自我發揮。至於第三類劇場,則以一種內在生命面對觀眾,以喚起他們深層認知作為己任。這是一種象徵劇場,訴諸觀者的集體潛意識,由告羅多斯基發揚光大,由巴爾巴傳承。在這類劇場中,演員不能倚賴寫實的風格演出,他 /她不是去 「扮演」哈姆雷特或埃及妖后,而需要面對、詮釋角色,然後把這個 「碰撞」的結果呈現在觀眾面前。於是,演員不再是編劇家的奴隸,而是當家作主,自我創作。(9

或許,這樣可以說明奧汀劇團作品的魅力和與別不同的風格。他們甚少依賴現成劇本,都是小組或集體創作。這種形式的作品是否真的可以達到觀者的深層意識,其實有一定的限制,最大的挑戰是演員如何把一己的主觀價值或認知,變成觀眾可以認同的客觀事物、情節和意象,而且,文化差異也會是絆腳石。年前來港演出的奧汀劇目 《鯨魚骨架之內》就遇上這個問題。 《安徒生的夢》是紀念童話大師安徒生生二百周年之委約作品,內容與他十一個童話的題材,甚至與他顛沛流離的童年都有關,如果觀眾對這些背景毫不知曉的話,是很難欣賞演出的。

二零零七年丹麥傳奇之旅在感動和感謝的心情下完結。筆者獲益良多之外,亦同時得到一個體會,真正的藝術家,誠如巴爾巴、郭寶崑 (10)和英若誠 (11)等人,都散發出一個自然令人景仰的風範。他們對後輩的啟導,都是無私和充滿誠意。他們的生命雖然有限,但是他們的藝術,卻是最具生命力的!

1. 《苦山行》是根據香港慈善機構 「苗圃行動」的 「行路上廣州」籌款活動的事跡寫成,由沙田話劇團演出,首演於 一九九六年夏天「中港台戲劇展演及研討會」,地點北京人民藝術劇團小劇場。該會後被追認為 「第一屆華文戲劇節」。
2. 《山海經傳》世界首演於二零零八年五月底,由筆者在香港中文大學策劃的 「高行健藝術節」中,演出地點是新亞書院圓形廣場。
3.  文章見諸本期學刋中。
4.  Odin 是北歐的主要神衹,主管智慧、戰爭和詩歌。巴爾巴把劇團命名如此,背後的意義可見一斑。
5.  筆者當時的表演是一邊打太極拳,一邊朗誦蘇軾的 《念奴嬌》。
6.  巴爾巴在告羅多斯基生前,在自己的辦公室旁設有一個房間,供老師使用。告氏過世後,這個房間仍然保留。
7.  此劇曾被康樂及文化署主辦,於二零零四年十一月演出於香港文化中心劇場。
8.  鄧樹榮著《梅耶荷德表演論—研究與反思》 81頁、青文書屋、2001年。
9.  James Roose-Evans. Experimental Theatre From Stanislavsky to Peter Brook. P. 165 – 167. Routledge. 1997.
10. 前新加坡實踐劇團創辦人,二零零三年去世。去世前三年,創立 「劇場訓練與研究課程」,繼續多元化劇場的探索。
11. 已故北京人民藝術劇院演員及導演、翻譯家,曾任中國文化部副部長,對中國開放,有一定的貢獻。